Conciseness

Every line earns its place: a two-line rationale for retirement ("unbounded color palettes, no real paper figures, and no print-canvas verification"), one unambiguous action ("Immediately proceed with /paper-poster-html, passing through all of the user's arguments unchanged"), and a fallback git pointer. There is no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows — anchor 5.

Actionability

The instruction is fully executable and leaves no room for misinterpretation: invoke /paper-poster-html with arguments unchanged, do not attempt the legacy LaTeX flow, and use `git log -- skills/paper-poster/SKILL.md` if LaTeX source is ever mandated. Per the rubric's instruction-only note, the absence of code is not penalized because the guidance is concrete and actionable.

Workflow Clarity

This is a single-task skill whose one action (redirect to the successor skill) is completely unambiguous, and "Do not attempt the legacy LaTeX flow" removes the only plausible wrong path. The rubric's simple-skill exception applies — no multi-step workflow or validation checkpoints are needed for a non-destructive redirect.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is 13 lines with a clear heading, and no bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent), so there is nothing to disclose progressively. The single external pointer (git history) is one level deep and clearly signaled, satisfying the rubric's simple-skill exception for skills under 50 lines with no need for external references.

Specificity

"Kept only as a redirect for muscle memory" and "superseded by /paper-poster-html" name the poster domain and one concrete action (redirect to a named successor), but the description enumerates none of the skill's actual capabilities. This matches anchor 3 (names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive) rather than 4 (no list of several specific actions) or 2 (the successor is named precisely, not generic).

Completeness

The "what" is clear (a deprecated redirect to /paper-poster-html), but the "when" is only negatively stated ("do not use for new posters") with no positive "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. Not 4 because the "when" is not explicitly stated for any use case.

Trigger Term Quality

The only natural keyword present is "posters" (plus the skill name itself); common user phrases like "conference poster", "paper", or "LaTeX poster" are absent. Fits anchor 3 (some relevant keywords but missing common variations/synonyms), not 4, since coverage is thin rather than good with a few gaps.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"DEPRECATED", "do not use for new posters", and the named sibling skill make it highly distinguishable and steer routing away from itself. However, it inherently shares poster-related triggers with the closely related /paper-poster-html, matching anchor 4 (mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills) rather than 5 (it has no distinct triggers of its own).